How do we solve this problem? Mental health care

As I go over the system and how it works I'm trying to understand how the government should fix the problem. Should the government prevent insurance companies from putting arbitrary caps on mental health care coverage? Should the government offer long term treatment options for the mentally ill? What's the government's role in all this? The fact is, they have done NOTHING and Congress is quite aware that parents all over the country are forced to make the decision to relinquish all the time.

(And seriously, I'm not asking for advice or anyone to debate the choice we might have to make. This isn't a DML. I threw out my situation because I think people don't realize that this actually to normal, average families and so often there are no other options.)

Comments (87)

I will also add that in California the voters approved an initiative to raise and spend a certain amount of money on mental health services. One of the primary arguments was that by eliminating the spending on mental health services (back in the 80s) we were now paying significantly more in running prisons and for homeless services.

I'm not even sure UHC is a solution simply because UHC still comes with restrictions designed to save the government money. I might be wrong here, but I do think in this country we have access to some of the best mental health services in the world. The breakthroughs we've made in mental health over the past 10 years have been a result of our demographics. And this level of care is EXPENSIVE and often it doesn't work. I think that's the big issue. I don't expect UHC to provide anything any better.

I do know that so many of the kids that my son has been in inpatient short-term facilities with have been reliquished. It is the only option so many parents have. And then the parents deal with the shame and stigma of abandoning their child.

The fact is, even the federal government imposes caps, unless the person is declared disabled by the Social Security Administration, and that is a process in itself (and open to abuse as well). Regardless of who is footing the bill, there are not unlimited resources, and very little is proven regarding the efficacy of different treatment methods for different types of mental illnesses.

^^^ many people who need lobg term mental health treatment do qualify for SSD. The fact is that many permanently mentally ill need long term treatment and thank goodness there still are state run mental health facilities that care for patients or else those people would be in the prison system or on the streets. Long term mental health treatment is successful to the extent that it keeps people stable or at least protected. The cost of the chronic mentally ill will always be there, whether we care for these people or not.

I do know that so many of the kids that my son has been in inpatient short-term facilities with have been reliquished. It is the only option so many parents have. And then the parents deal with the shame and stigma of abandoning their child.
----------
Does relinquishing custody ensure that they will get continued inpatient care? If so, then the resources ARE there and parents should be given access without having to give up their children. If not, then what is the benefit of relinquishing custody?

Does relinquishing custody ensure that they will get continued inpatient care? If so, then the resources ARE there and parents should be given access without having to give up their children. If not, then what is the benefit of relinquishing custody?